On 29/01/15 19:19, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > I didn't even know about this page, > <http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_compliance.html>, until I saw an update on > the Apache ooo-site SVN yesterday. I glanced at it and didn't think much > about it. > > Today, Simon Phipps has pointed out how strange that page is. I agree. If > you stand back and look at the question from the perspective of someone > interested in adopting Apache OpenOffice in use, this page is not helpful. > Something, if anything, more straightforward and pertinent is called for, > based on what it is within our power to provide. I am grateful to Simon for > pointing out how over-reaching this page is. > > The current page speaks to matters that are none of our business as an Apache > Project and it somehow raises a matter of specialized interest as if it > matters broadly to adopters of software of various kinds. The footnote that > the ASF does not have such positions should have alerted me farther. > > I have only returned to the dev list for a few months, and I don't recall any > discussion about that page and the posture it presents in that period. >
I still don't see the problem with this page and I think it gives some interesting information for people who are not so familiar with open source software and the different open source licenses. It can be seen as background information. In the context of the "why" page it is dos no harm and just provides some more information that I find interesting, informative and worse reading. If we remove or change this page I believe that simply play the gm of other people and do what they want. I can imagine that some some people don't like it but this doesn't change the facts that are listed here. We have much more important things to do in the project than this and I hope we can and will concentrate on these important things. Juergen > SUGGESTION > > 1. Remove the page altogether. > > 2. Alternatively, perhaps make an affirmative page, if not already > adequately covered, about the safe use of the Apache OpenOffice binaries that > the project makes available. > > 2.1 That there is no requirement for licensing or registration, and that > there are no limitations on the redistribution or use of the binaries > (perhaps point to the Open Source Definition for more about that if anyone is > interested). This is a question that comes up from time to time and it would > be good to have that answered (if not already -- I am not looking around, but > I will). I suppose this could be why_adopt or why_use. It should also be > respectful of the broad community of open-source contributions in this space. > (I am making up why_mumble names just to give the idea of the orientation.) > > 2.2 Also point out that, as is the case for open-source software, the > source code is always available from the Project. That source code is > available for modification, adaptation, and creating of anyone's own binary > distributions so long as the applicable open-source licenses are honored. > This should be simple and perhaps link to a why_develop page. > > 2.3 The conditions, if any, that might face developers of extensions of > various kinds to be used with the AOO binaries might also be mentioned, but > just mentioned, and addressed with why_develop and any deep-dive details from > there. > > This should all be done as an affirmation of how AOO is an open-source > project and what is provided by the project. It is not ours to explain or > describe anecdotally or otherwise the circumstances that that can arise in > accord with different licensing models. > > Otherwise, wouldn't we owe it to our users to explain that we provide no > indemnification for patent violations that can arise by use of AOO-provided > binaries (or source) in a manner where essential claims of some patent are > infringed, and they also need to read the Disclaimer in the License? > > -- Dennis E. Hamilton > orc...@apache.org > dennis.hamil...@acm.org +1-206-779-9430 > https://keybase.io/orcmid PGP F96E 89FF D456 628A > X.509 certs used and requested for signed e-mail > > PS: I had occasion to say elsewhere that users should not be addressed in > order to co-opt them as cannon fodder in someone else's war. That is usually > not helpful, especially considering where most of our users are operating. > For me, we show the value to users of relying on Apache OpenOffice by > demonstrating our care for them, whatever they are up to, and how that care > is embodied in the distributions that are provided. What matters is our good > work. Part of our care is operating as an ASF Project and providing > open-source licensing and development. I assert that it is the carefulness > and good will, and how breakdowns are dealt with, that has AOO be trustworthy > and maybe has the project be seen as exemplary of open-source goodness. > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
